It happens every March. A high school basketball team, almost always a school of choice or a school populated by an entrance lottery, plays in the small school division and crushes all opponents, most specifically, public school opponents.

As I watched Capital Prep celebrate a girls Class S state championship at Mohegan Sun last weekend, the question burst forth again: How can we stage a balanced tournament? What can we do to give small public schools a fair chance to win a championship?

Tourney mastermind Bob "Jiggs" Cecchini and his CIAC compadres have tried to manufacture a competitive tourney for years, and clearly, most everything they have done has worked, except in the small school category. Far too many small schools, particularly schools of choice, can build powerhouse teams. Legitimate small-town schools in Class S haven't got a chance.

My favorite comment from a boys coach came during a CIAC media luncheon a few years ago. A coach lavished praise on his team, which was about to play in a state final. He said, "I can't believe what this school has done with only 90 boys."

My favorite comment this weekend came from Thomaston coach Bob McMahon. After the defeat to Capital Prep, McMahon praised his opponent's talent, and said: "The general manager of Capital Prep did a helluva job. They put together a nice team."

Thomaston, one of the smallest schools in the state, clawed its way into a Class S final, only to meet up with a magnet school that, though small in enrollment, is overstocked with talent. Capital Prep playing in Class S was just darn silly.

Which returns us to the question we've asked time and again: What to do with the state basketball tournament? No one has an answer. The best idea by the CIAC is a mathematical formula that kicks private schools, parochial schools and magnet schools — actually all schools

See CIAC, Page 5C

— up the competitive ladder by tacking on enrollment numbers.

It's not working.

Before a school like Capital Prep moves up, before enrollment numbers are added thanks to tourney success, it still has the chance to slam opponents around. Prep should have never been in Class S.

However, there is a state tournament that deals with this issue in an efficient way: ice hockey.

Each year, teams are moved in and out of the three divisions. Many factors are in play, like past tourney success, regular season records and, of course, enrollment, but enrollment is hardly a key factor in a sport where one-third of all teams are co-ops.

In hockey, a state tourney committee meets, analyzes and moves teams up and down as it sees fit to craft three competitive divisions.

"It has served the sport very well," said Joe Tonelli, who oversees the hockey committee. "There are many factors that the committee considers."

The hockey committee focuses on what Tonelli described as "bubble teams," or teams that "require in-depth scrutiny."

Ohhhh, I like the sound of that.

Tonelli referred to teams that "think they are ready to play at the next level, and if we also think they are ready, we can move them up from Division III to Division II."

That works for me. The committee itself will examine a team and, in the case of girls basketball, for example, say, what the heck is Capital Prep doing in the Class S girls tournament? No way. Get them out of there. Move that team up to Class M, at the very least, or maybe Class L.

That happens in hockey, but not basketball.

"Well, for one thing, we have a lot of expertise on our hockey committee," Tonelli said, "and hockey coaches are a unique breed. They often come to us and say they believe they are ready for the move up."

And Tonneli added this: "It is something you can do in hockey because we have 57 teams. It is far more difficult in basketball, where you have 188."

Maybe, though I'm not sure we need to analyze all 53 girls teams in Class S, just a couple.

What we are talking about here is a subjective approach to placing teams, rather than a mathematical equation that adds enrollment numbers based on tourney success and uses a multiplier for schools of choice.

"It is done in fairness to kids," Tonelli said of the hockey approach, "to give them a great experience and have a chance to compete at their talent level."

Reader Comments

The following are comments from online readers like you. In no way do they represent the view of The Republican-American.

Ed M. of Waterbury wrote on Mar 19, 2013 11:57 PM:

" There should be a promotion and relegation system similar to what they have in Boys Ice Hockey in Basketball as well. Take Capital Prep and move them up a division if they win in that Div. repeatedly like they did big time in Class S.. In Boys Ice Hockey St. Joseph's of Trumbull won Div. 3 in 2009. They finished second in Div. two ( to-Amity) in 2010 and(S.J.) moved up to Div. One in 2011. They played in the Different Div. championship games at two levels( 2&1) in 2010 and 11. .The St. Joseph's boys ice hockey club is still in Div. one based on talent. Do the same with Capital prep and any school in any sport that wins big in one Div.. in numerous straight years as C.P. has done.Move Capital prep or any similar team in any sport up like St. Joseph's did in Ice hockey from 2009-11.. "

" It's too bad that it's too late for this year's fine group of girls. However, if enough of a stink is made this time around, maybe the next group of champions will have a legitimate chance of achieving their dreams. "

Submit a Comment

We encourage your feedback and dialog. Please be civil and respectful. Registered users comments will be posted automatically. All other comments will be reviewed by our staff before appearing on the Web site. If you're witty, to the point and quotable, your reader comments may also be included on the Around the Towns page of The Sunday Republican.